On 5/12/2015 3:38 PM, Warren Young wrote: > The OP said that each of his clients has artifacts in the repository > that can’t be shared with other sub-sections of the repository, for > unspecified reasons. He also talked about a shared code base. That’s > an N+1 situation.
Let me make a correction here. I am not the OP. That would be Abilio Marques. I amplified his points to show that there is some interest in a way to add some finer-grained protection to Fossil. In my view, the scripting mechanism may be the way to do it so the specifics of the implementation are given over to the administrator. The "unspecified" reasons are ITAR regulations and the like. They don't have to make sense because they flow down from government. I would prefer to not discuss them further. drh and I had a private conversation on this subject several years ago. -- Andy Goth | <andrew.m.goth/at/gmail/dot/com>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
